[HN Gopher] Generals.io - Capture enemy generals to defeat them ___________________________________________________________________ Generals.io - Capture enemy generals to defeat them Author : emj Score : 236 points Date : 2023-12-24 09:38 UTC (13 hours ago) (HTM) web link (generals.io) (TXT) w3m dump (generals.io) | _private wrote: | nice little game! | shakezzz wrote: | What do you think are they using for the map? | codefined wrote: | One of the original devs here. The map is just html with | position offsets! | ivanjermakov wrote: | HTML table | 0xDEAFBEAD wrote: | I used to play the 8-player version of this game a lot. Here's an | analysis of the strategy. I put it in rot13 in case you prefer to | discover for yourself. | | Gurer ner 3 onfvp fgengrtvrf va gur rneyl tnzr: | | 1. Encvq nffnhyg. Jnvg sbe n qrprag-fvmrq nezl ba lbhe pncvgny, | gura fgneg punetvat nebhaq gur znc naq ubcr gung lbh ner noyr gb | pncgher nabgure cynlre'f pncvgny juvyr vg'f cbbeyl qrsraqrq. | | 2. Encvq tebjgu. Sbphf ba pncghevat greevgbel naq arhgeny pvgvrf. | Ihyarenoyr gb encvq nffnhyg, fvapr pncghevat pvgvrf jvyy qrcyrgr | lbhe sbeprf va gur fubeg grez naq yrnir lbhe pncvgny ihyarenoyr. | | 3. Qrsrafvir tebjgu. Fybjre naq fgrnyguvre pncgher bs greevgbel | naq arhgeny pvgvrf, jurer lbh tebj pnhgvbhfyl naq sbphf ba | fheivivat encvq nffnhygf. Vg graqf gb ybfr gb encvq tebjgu, ohg | jva ntnvafg encvq nffnhyg. | | Fb gur guerr fgengrtvrf unir n ebpx/cncre/fpvffbef eryngvbafuvc. | Vs lbh abgvpr gung n cnegvphyne fgengrtl vf cbchyne va gur | pheerag zrgntnzr, lbh pna nqwhfg lbhe bja fgengrtl nppbeqvatyl. | | Va rvtug-cynlre, lbh xabj gurer jvyy or frira ybfref. Vs lbh jnag | gb or gur bar jvaare, lbh unir gb trg yhpxl. Fb vg znxrf frafr gb | yrna gbjneqf n uvtu-inevnapr fgengrtl yvxr encvq tebjgu be encvq | nffnhyg. | | Va gur zvq naq yngr tnzr, cynlref graq gb or birezngpurq ntnvafg | rnpu bgure. Lbh'yy unir whfg 2 be 3 rzcverf erznvavat. Hfhnyyl | bar rzcver jvyy or fvtavsvpnagyl fgebatre. Vs lbh ner gur jrnxre | rzcver, lbhe orfg fubg gb jva vf trarenyyl gb sbez n znffvir nezl | jvgu nyy bs lbhe sbeprf, punetr vagb lbhe bccbarag'f greevgbel, | naq frr vs lbh pna gnxr gurve pncvgny qhevat n zbzrag jura vg'f | cbbeyl qrsraqrq. Vs lbh ner gur fgebatre rzcver, lbh xabj lbh'er | tbvat gb jva ol qrsnhyg qhr gb gur fabjonyy angher bs gur tnzr. | Fb gur vzcbegnag guvat vf gb qrsraq ntnvafg gur fbeg bs fhecevfr | nggnpx V whfg qrfpevorq. Gurer unir bayl orra n srj gvzrf jura V | ybfg sebz n cbfvgvba bs fgeratgu, jura zl jrnxre bccbarag znantrq | gb bhgcynl zr ba gur onfvp zrpunavpf bs greevgbel naq pvgl | pncgher. Nernf jvgu n uvtu qrafvgl bs pvgvrf ner rfcrpvnyyl | inyhnoyr gb gnxr pbageby bs, vs lbh pna znantr gb qb vg, juvpu | graqf gb or qvssvphyg. | Jabrov wrote: | Deciphered if you don't feel like doing it and want to read it | here: | | There are 3 basic strategies in the early game: | | 1. Rapid assault. Wait for a decent-sized army on your capital, | then start charging around the map and hope that you are able | to capture another player's capital while it's poorly defended. | | 2. Rapid growth. Focus on capturing territory and neutral | cities. Vulnerable to rapid assault, since capturing cities | will deplete your forces in the short term and leave your | capital vulnerable. | | 3. Defensive growth. Slower and stealthier capture of territory | and neutral cities, where you grow cautiously and focus on | surviving rapid assaults. It tends to lose to rapid growth, but | win against rapid assault. | | So the three strategies have a rock/paper/scissors | relationship. If you notice that a particular strategy is | popular in the current metagame, you can adjust your own | strategy accordingly. In eight-player, you know there will be | seven losers. | | If you want to be the one winner, you have to get lucky. So it | makes sense to lean towards a high-variance strategy like rapid | growth or rapid assault. | | In the mid and late game, players tend to be overmatched | against each other. You'll have just 2 or 3 empires remaining. | Usually one empire will be significantly stronger. If you are | the weaker empire, your best shot to win is generally to form a | massive army with all of your forces, charge into your | opponent's territory, and see if you can take their capital | during a moment when it's poorly defended. If you are the | stronger empire, you know you're going to win by default due to | the snowball nature of the game. So the important thing is to | defend against the sort of surprise attack I just described. | There have only been a few times when I lost from a position of | strength, when my weaker opponent managed to outplay me on the | basic mechanics of territory and city capture. Areas with a | high density of cities are especially valuable to take control | of, if you can manage to do it, which tends to be difficult. | mat_epice wrote: | If the GP wanted to hide it, it's a pretty strange thing to | explicitly unhide it. | jimmywetnips wrote: | I appreciate it | chrisweekly wrote: | I appreciate it too. The deciphered version is clearly | noted as such, which even respects the OP intent in | giving readers the choice to skip reading it. | chaps wrote: | To be honest it's a strange thing to rot13. I get why OP | did it, but I'm really not sure the benefit outweighs the | negatives or that it accomplished what it was supposed to. | Those aren't exactly spoilers in the same way as visual | media, where a fraction of a second can reveal the whole | story. | | Brb painting a shed. | jasonwatkinspdx wrote: | It's just one person's perspective on strategy not some | sort of spoilers or cheat codes. | veqq wrote: | There are many problems here. Taking a neutral city costs 40 | troops, taking a long time to recuperate. You're better off | looking for the enemy and attacking immediately, only taking | neutral cities in the late game when it takes 20+ moves to | deploy men against the enemy. | | Attacking the enemy is better than taking neutral territory, | n.b. you want to do this towards the end of the turn so your | conquered territory will respawn. | cmrdporcupine wrote: | Was going to reply to say the same thing. It's tempting to | take neutral cities at the start and sometimes I do it, but | it's almost always a mistake, and I can usually tell when | other players do it and they make easy pickings. It takes a | long time to recover from taking a city, and the payoff | isn't worth it until you have a lot of them. | | It's better to cover a large swathe of territory. This can | hide where your general is, and every 25 turns you can | collect armies from the squares. Build up that way and then | you wait for someone next to you to get into a fight with | someone else, or take a neutral city, and then bomb in on | them in force when they can't defend, and take advantage of | all of their hard work. | | There's also a bit of a "dark forest" aspect to the game, | where you can benefit from being hidden for a long time at | the beginning of the game, but you have to trade this off | with the disadvantage of not being able to build adequate | forces in that time. | | I'm "bubbles" in the game. | ViktorV wrote: | In high level play you have to manage your land, the hard | thing is how to find the optimal route to collect your | army: It's advisable to take around 15-18 turns to collect | your army from an area and attack in the remaining 10-7 | turns, so you can attack before the enemy numbers increase. | In high level 1v1 play what matters most is the area you | have, if you can get +1 area per 25 rounds from your enemy | you'll probably win. | | But! As both of you collect more and more area it gets | really time consuming and after a point you just can't | collect your army optimally. I'd argue that the biggest | difference between skill levels at the highest levels is | how efficient the collecting is. At that point you'll need | cities. Always look for the opponent's counter to know how | many cities your opponent has. | | Not that it matters but I was a top 5 1v1 player quite a | while ago. | _a_a_a_ wrote: | Oh, well done mate! gratz. Maybe he ROT'd it for a reason. | cced wrote: | Seriously just post the strategy with a spoiler alert. | whoChumpedwho wrote: | rematch | Jabrov wrote: | Just tried this out for the first time and I'm hooked! It even | works OK on mobile | matrss wrote: | I just played a few matches on my phone and there seems to be | some bug that can detect you as afk and loose you the game for | no apparent reason (i.e. while making moves). It's really a | good game otherwise. | reitzensteinm wrote: | Blast from the past! I played this a bunch when it was first | posted here, rose to #2 on the 8v8 US leader board, then went on | to make a similar game called Starjack which hit ~1k concurrent | players in 2019 (although it's no longer available). | | Luck plays a role, but the game is almost entirely about reading | what other players are doing and thinking and reacting | appropriately. It's poker, not chess. I had a win rate | significantly over 50%, and hit a greater than 10 win streak at | one point in 8v8. | | To add to some strategies posted here - although I haven't played | in five years (around the time that movement started to be | buffered), so things may have changed. I played a quick game to | jog my memory while writing this (and won it of course!) | | The army count list tells you even more than exploring, and | correctly reading what's happening is key to high level play. | | 1) An AFK player will slowly accumulate units on a predictable | schedule. They may or may not come back. AFK to build up units | and suddenly attack is a poor strategy, so you don't have to be | worried about them, but there are edge cases where you can get | stung. | | 2) Players that have army counts that drop together are adjacent | - use this to understand where on the grid players are. | | 3) If only a single player has an army count drop, they're | attacking a neutral city. It's a good time to attack as they've | made a large, long term investment. | | 4) Players that have expanded but not lost any armies in a while | are looking for a chance to attack - be careful if you're next to | them. | | 5) When players fighting a war of attrition, stubbornly trading | armies when they're not the only two left, they're probably not | very good. A well timed swoop in at the end of the fight will | capture all of the production. Don't get involved before that, | because they're not very good and will start a war of attrition | with you :) | | 6) At the start, neutral territory has an immense ROI. Capture as | much as you possibly can. Don't worry too much about cities. | | 7) Generally, neutral territory with high numbers at the end of | the game correlates with starting locations. | | 8) Pay a lot of attention to the star ratings of the players to | know who is good and who isn't. Picking on beginners is fantastic | strategy, because you can generally capture their armies intact. | | 9) Pay just as much attention to how well people are playing. | Expert players will maximise neutral ground, and after the first | pop at turn 25, you'll immediately see who you have to pay | attention to. | | 10) If a player has launched a massed attack on you, it's often a | better strategy to counterattack if you think you know where | their base is better than they know where yours is. If you win, | you'll capture their army intact and this often guarantees a win. | | 11) If you're not in the lead, throw everything you have into | conflict where you think you have advantage. You are at this | point "default dead", and if you play conservatively you'll lose. | | 12) If you are in the lead, you can now profitably consolidate | cities without the power drop opening you up to attacks. Keep a | good chunk of an army close to your base to prevent sneak | attacks, and expand out to neutral territory as quickly as you | can, preparing to jump on anyone that's weak. You're "default | alive". | taway789aaa6 wrote: | I keep losing games because "you went AFK" even though I've been | moving units. What is considered "AFK"? Pretty frustrating tbh | calderknight wrote: | in FFA, you need to take at least 10 tiles by turn 60. That | means 11 tiles including your general. But if you encounter | another player before turn 60 it won't make you afk no matter | what. | cjbprime wrote: | (And note that to play well you'd want more like one tile | every two-or-less seconds in FFA.) | EduardoBautista wrote: | It appears as though, for the keyboard shortcuts, they are | matching on the "key", as in the actual letter, instead of the | "code", which is more accurate regarding the actual position of | the key. | | Just a minor annoyance for alternative keyboard layout users. | Cool game, though! | jtokoph wrote: | This is something I never thought about. So key codes are based | on the physical location of the key on a standard | layout/qwerty, and changing your layout will cause the key | value to change but not the code? | an_ko wrote: | Yes, approximately. In X11 at least, the hardware codes are | called keycodes, and the human readable names are called | keysyms. Example of the XkbKeycodeToKeysym function in use: h | ttps://github.com/anko/xkbcat/blob/8abc3402cb679027a3bd0313.. | . | | Keysyms don't necessarily strictly match "key location"; | keyboards are allowed to output whatever codes they want for | whatever key they want (see e.g. QMK firmware; often used in | custom keyboards to do complex conditional key remapping), | but they're in practice relatively consistent between common | keys on most keyboards, and consistent on the same keyboard | even if you switch keyboard layouts in software, unless you | have some custom keyboard firmware which functionality is | stateful. | brainzap wrote: | I thought the turns are fixed | birracerveza wrote: | This might have the best UX for onboarding I've ever seen. The | game is pretty damn good too. Turn based but real time is really | interesting. | | EDIT Ok this is addicting. Mobile version when? It is playable on | mobile but having a touchable direction pad would work wonders. | spintin wrote: | You need WASD and E... and mouse. I have bluetooth keyboard + | mouse on my tablet. XD | fodkodrasz wrote: | Great game, great UX. | | On suggestion for the UI: in replay the POV checkbox should be | unfocused after click, or event bubbling stopped, as space-bar | toggles both the autoplay and the POV now. | avdlinde wrote: | Neat clone of empire attack (now defunct, | https://www.ianandrew.com/empire-attack). Used to play the 10 day | variants there which were great fun, although more defense | focused I think. | vzhou842 wrote: | original creator of generals.io here (late to the party) | | really cool to see people still having fun with this game I made | in college! I sold the game a few years back because I didn't | have time to properly maintain it, and I'm glad the new owners | have kept it running. | | Linking to some past HN threads on this: | | - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13145781 original | generals.io post | | - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13562866 launch of the Bot | API | umvi wrote: | How much does a game/IP like that sell for, if I may ask? | winterrx wrote: | +1 also curious | pton_xd wrote: | 2-3x yearly net revenue, more if you're lucky. | | Revenue is ultimately a function of DAU, either via ad RPMs | or IAP / subscription conversion rate. | | Also most sales agreements have a confidentiality covenant. | umvi wrote: | > 2-3x yearly net revenue, more if you're lucky. | | And what is the yearly net revenue of a game like generals? | | > Also most sales agreements have a confidentiality | covenant | | Yeah that's super annoying. I'm mainly just interested in | the ballpark. $10k? $50k? $100k? $500k? >$1m? | spintin wrote: | Did you ever consider to make the game persistent and MMO? | | If so what made you resign that? | jzting wrote: | hi victor, good to see you here! hope you're well :) | gdsdfe wrote: | I'm always amazed how a simple game can be fun | voidfunc wrote: | This used to be the game I played during long nights at my | previous startup when I had downtime. | | Both good and bad memories. | xaellison wrote: | "This username is not okay." c'mon "barfnuggets" is not that | offensive | saulpw wrote: | This game is a dopamine trap that has been bad for my brain | (since 2020). I have a bogus entry in my /etc/hosts to keep me | from playing it, and yet I too often disable it because I can't | help myself. It's like crack. | encoderer wrote: | Yeah I had the same issue with it in like 2017-18. Very | addictive and ultimately unsatisfying gameplay. Juice not worth | the squeeze. If you struggle with distraction and dopamine | loops just avoid it. You aren't missing much. | | I also did the hosts file block and removed it. It's just like | any addictive behavior though: break the habit for a week or | two and you won't miss it. For me I was visiting family for 2 | weeks and they had terrible internet so I couldn't win the game | anyway. | hardlianotion wrote: | I saw this the first time around. Loved it. Then I started losing | quickly... | hardlianotion wrote: | Anyway. Would do again. | bl4kers wrote: | I tried playing but it booted me for being "AFK" even though I | was tapping the whole time | psikomanjak wrote: | I am loving this | johnmorrison wrote: | I love this game, got pretty into it around 2016/17 and rose to | the top of the global 1v1 leaderboard for a while. Really cool to | see it still running :D ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-12-24 23:00 UTC)